I wonder if the reporters are going to be interviewed as well.
After all, if they are going to ID the leaker, the forum for the leak should be fair game as well.
Or so it seems to me.
Cheers,
knewshound
Latest Column The Last Normal Day 22 Aug 2006
Posted on 07/28/2006 11:50:52 AM PDT by STARWISE
Finally some reports are coming out regarding the NSA leak investigation and their prime target for the leaks: Capitol Hill. Jay Rockefeller, who was interviewed for the NY Times story which exposed our efforts to identify terrorists here in the US ready to attack us, is probably on the interview list.
From the sounds of the reporting it does not appear to be a pleasant exercise for these all powerful men and women in Congress:
There are also indications from at least one Senator, Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), that the FBI is asking Members about comments of theirs that appeared in other publications regarding the NSA program.
The interviews, which came about after extensive negotiations this spring between the Justice Department and the counsels for the House and Senate, are taking place in Members’ Congressional offices, usually with two FBI agents and one Justice Department lawyer in attendance. Members are also permitted to have a House or Senate counsel on hand if they wished.
Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL), House Intelligence Chairman Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) have already been interviewed. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) is expected to be interviewed soon.
I hope Roll Call, which has the full story behind a subscription barrier, will see fit to publicize their full reporting. Either way, this is good news that the leaks are being taken seriously and serious measures are being invoked.
Is there a tall tree on the White House front lawn?? I have plenty of rope, and we can rent a horse!!!
Beware of the political class protecting ITSELF.
Ping!
Any subscribers to Roll Call here willing to give us some more info?
Bingo. Two words
John McCain
Watch the same press that howled for a leak investigation re: Valerie Plame, now howl against one on NSA.
Anyone responsible for disclosing classfied information to the NY Times or any other unauthorized entity should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law be they Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal.
Hopefully these Congresspeople being questioned haven't forgotten what Lewis Libby has been charged with.
Just for show, IMHO.
founder of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC)
Sibel Edmonds, a 32-year-old Turkish-American, was hired as a translator by the FBI shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001
Edmonds was hired, as a contractor, to work as an interpreter in the translations unit of the FBI on September 20, 2001.
The daughter of an Azerbaijani doctor, Edmonds lived in Iran and then Turkey until coming to the United States as a student in 1988. She became an American citizen in 1996. In addition to English, Edmonds is fluent in Turkish, Persian and Azeri. She earned her masters degree in public policy and international commerce from George Mason University, and her bachelors in criminal justice and psychology from George Washington University.
Edmonds was to file a deposition in this case regarding her claim that FBI had foreknowledge of al-Qaeda's attacks against the World Trade Center.
On August 5, 2005, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) petitioned for the Supreme Court of the United States to review the lower courts' application of the State Secret Privilege in both lawsuits. The ACLU claims that the courts conflated the State Secrets Privilege and the Totten rule.[4] On November 28, 2005, the Supreme Court declined to review the decisions.
In August, 2004, Edmonds founded the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC), an alliance of whistleblowers who have come forward to address security weaknesses of the US. The NSWBC helps national security agency whistleblowers through advocacy of governmental and legal reform, public education on whistleblowing activity, provision of comfort and fellowship to national security whistleblowers suffering retaliation and other harms, and working with other public interest organizations. NSWBC is involved in backing former intelligence analyst Russ Tice, who was dismissed by the National Security Agency (NSA) in May, 2005. On December 16, 2005, ABC reported that Tice was among the sources of a leak about illegal NSA wiretap programs, ordered by the White House and first disclosed by the New York Times.
Thre have been a lot of leaks. My guess is that they from the Inspector General's office, since they would have access to information about disparate programs and some of them may have a chip on their shoulders about intel work.
I'm not holding my breath waiting for justice here.
Edmonds told U.S. News that she and other whistle-blowers from the FBI, CIA, National Security Agency, and Department of Homeland Security are so furious with the lack of congressional oversight on intelligence and national security that they plan to launch an advertising campaign targeting government officials who have allegedly endangered national security. The newspaper ads, which could be launched as early as two months from now, would name officials, their titles, their salaries, where they work, and their alleged or documented wrongdoing, says Edmonds. The campaign would be funded by private donations and would be coordinated by the recently formed advocacy group she heads, the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition.
BUMP!
Is this why Rockefeller has been missing ?
--
I think he is still probably recovering from back surgery if my memory is still in working order.
November 6, 2003 Rockefeller memo Here is the full text of the memo from the office of Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa.) on setting a strategy for pursuing an independent investigation of pre-war White House intelligence dealings on Iraq.
We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:
1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard.
For example, in addition to the President's State of the Union speech, the chairman [Sen. Pat Roberts] has agreed to look at the activities of the office of the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department.
The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and cosigns our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. [We can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.]
2) Assiduously prepare Democratic 'additional views' to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it.
In that regard we may have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims. We will contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry.
The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an Independent Commission [i.e., the Corzine Amendment.]
3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation of the administration's use of intelligence at any time. But we can only do so once.
The best time to do so will probably be next year, either:
A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report, thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public. Additional views on the interim report (1). The announcement of our independent investigation (2). And (3) additional views on the final investigation. Or:
B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue, we would attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the use of intelligence.
In the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter footdragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman. We have independently submitted written requests to the DOD and we are preparing further independent requests for information.
SUMMARY: Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet we have an important role to play in revealing the misleading, if not flagrantly dishonest, methods and motives of senior administration officials who made the case for unilateral preemptive war.
The approach outlined above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives.
© 2003 The Hill
733 Fifteenth Street, NW Suite 1140
Washington, DC 20005
202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax
The gang that couldn’t shoot straight trying to deep-six a courageous President Bush.
Spine implant?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.